Why Reddit, 4chan Attempt to ID Marathon Bomber Went Bad

Explosions take runners and onlookers by surprise at the 117th Boston Marathon.

Getty/Boston Globe

This week has brought us a veritable witch hunt as details about Monday's deadly Boston Marathon explosions have continued to be hazy, at best. Online, the hunt has been for information -- or even speculation that "sounds about right" -- on who could be behind the two blasts that left three dead and dozens injured. On cable news, the hunt, as it always is, has been to get new information out first. After all -- you have to compete with the internet.

The problem is, nearly a week later, we've misidentified a whole lot of people via online channels as the perpetrators, and many print and cable organizations have just rolled with it.

Wondering how we ended up here?

People have been closely studying images and video footage from this week's Boston Marathon bombing in an effort to find suspicious activity and possible suspects. They've been comparing the FBI's images of what remained of the bag thought to have held a homemade explosive to the straps, buckles, and tags on bags used by onlookers that day. In doing this, the Reddit community came up with various theories and possibilities, including zeroing in on two men carrying bags near the site of the explosion -- one, a large backpack, and the other a duffel bag.

Having faces to go with a story tends to both calm and ignite. Within minutes, one of the men ID'd found his name posted online, and turned to Facebook to clear himself. As one Reddit user explained, "Blue track suit guy's Facebook info got out. I won't post it but this guy is not the bomber. His latest Facebook post shows him freaking out that he is on TV as the bomber. He said he was going to court to say he didn't do it."

But while it may be understandable, even expected, for online citizens to get things wrong in their search for answers, mainstream media outlets haven't fared much better. And the hunt for a suspect in the absence of concrete, well-sourced evidence has already prompted some (quite organized) criticism in the form of this "Give It Arrest" chart and a healthy dose of Twitter snark -- a snark that at least one anonymous and eristic TV executive feels has "reached new heights."

Bigger picture? When incorrect news is shared, we all fail, regardless of the source. And when big, ostensibly trustworthy news sources fail to check and double-check their sources, as apparently happened this week, it opens the door for the kind of "vigilante journalism" growing across the web, whether that means fed-up and impatient communities searching for clues on their own, or smug (yet validated) armchair pundits weighing in from the sidelines. It isn't a case of a snake eating its own tail so much as a snake rabidly consuming itself as quickly as possible, while the mongooses look on and think up a hashtag.